Islamic Views on the Abrahamic and Sinai Covenants in Relation to Heritage and Relics

There is no specific Abrahamic relic that has been preserved through Jewish generations, similar to the Kaaba, the Black Stone (Hajar al-Aswad) and the Station of Abraham (Maqam Ibrahim) in Islam. The sole significant artifact associated with Jewish heritage is the Ark of the Covenant.

However, it is important to note that the Ark can be traced back to Moses rather than Abraham and was lost during the destruction of the First Temple. Consequently, Islamic scholars maintain that the Israelites were bound by the Sinai Covenant, while Muslims are considered to be under the Abrahamic Covenant. How does their argument go?

The argument presented by Islamic scholars regarding the Abrahamic Covenant and the Sinai Covenant is based on several theological and historical points. To understand their perspective, let's break down the key elements:

1. Abrahamic Covenant vs. Sinai Covenant:

The Abrahamic Covenant is believed to be the original covenant between God and Abraham, which includes promises of land, descendants, and blessings.
The Sinai Covenant, also known as the Mosaic Covenant, was established between God and the Israelites through Moses at Mount Sinai.

2. Islamic view on continuity:

Islamic scholars argue that Muslims are the true inheritors of the Abrahamic Covenant, which they consider to be universal and eternal.
They contend that the Sinai Covenant was specific to the Israelites and was temporary or conditional.

3. Lack of physical relics:

The absence of a specific Abrahamic relic in Jewish tradition, comparable to the Kaaba, the Black Stone, or the Station of Abraham in Islam, is seen by some Islamic scholars as significant.
They argue that this absence might indicate a break in the direct line of Abrahamic heritage.

4. The Ark of the Covenant:

While the Ark of the Covenant is a significant artifact in Jewish history, it is associated with Moses rather than Abraham.
Its loss during the destruction of the First Temple is sometimes interpreted by Islamic scholars as a symbolic end to the Sinai Covenant.

5. Islamic claim to Abrahamic heritage:

Islamic scholars often emphasize the direct lineage of Muhammad to Abraham through Ishmael.
They argue that Islam represents a restoration of the original Abrahamic monotheism, unencumbered by later additions or alterations.

6. Universality vs. particularity:

The Islamic view often presents the Abrahamic Covenant as universal, meant for all of humanity.
In contrast, they view the Sinai Covenant as particular to the Israelites and not binding on all people.

7. Supersessionism:

Some Islamic interpretations incorporate a form of supersessionism, suggesting that Islam supersedes earlier revelations and covenants.

It's important to note that this argument represents a specific Islamic perspective and is not universally accepted outside of Islamic scholarship. Jewish and Christian traditions have their own interpretations of these covenants and their ongoing relevance. The topic of covenants and their applicability is a complex theological issue with various interpretations across different faith traditions.

Contrasting Narratives: The Story of Hagar and Ishmael in Islamic and Judeo-Christian Traditions

Genesis 21, verses 9 to 10, reads:

But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.”

Certain Islamic scholars assert that the narrative concerning Hagar and Ishmael as depicted in the Torah may have undergone modifications by later scribes. They propose that the verses in Genesis 21, verses 9 to 10 may have been inserted at a later date, given that Hagar and Ishmael had already left Abraham's household prior to the birth of Isaac. Furthermore, Islamic tradition indicates that Ishmael was an infant during this period (when departing from Abraham’s household).

The story of Abraham, Hagar, and Ishmael is recounted in both Islamic and Judeo-Christian traditions, but the interpretations of events differ significantly, especially regarding motivations and circumstances.

In Islamic tradition, the narrative emphasizes that Abraham's decision to leave Hagar and Ishmael in the desert was a direct command from God. This command is viewed as a test of Abraham's faith and obedience to divine will. Muslims interpret Abraham's actions as noble and part of a larger divine plan, which highlights his trust in God's wisdom. The act is not attributed to any personal motives, such as jealousy or resentment, but is instead seen as a fulfilling of God's purpose for Abraham and his family.

Conversely, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, the focus shifts more towards human emotions and relationships. The narrative often centers around Sarah's jealousy and insecurity upon seeing Ishmael mock Isaac, her son with Abraham. This jealousy leads Sarah to demand that Abraham expel Hagar and Ishmael from their home. This viewpoint highlights how complicated human feelings can be and the possible disagreements that might occur within family relationships. These conflicts can lead to feelings of being left out due to personal emotions.

Concerning the age discrepancy, Islamic texts typically depict Ishmael as a nursing infant when Hagar was left in the desert. This portrayal aligns with the practical realities of the situation, as it is more feasible for a mother to carry a small child rather than an older one. The narrative implies that Hagar, in her role as a mother, is caring for a very young child, which makes Abraham's abandonment of them even more poignant given their vulnerability.

In contrast, the Biblical account presents Ishmael as approximately 17 years old at the time of his expulsion. This significant age difference raises questions about the practicality of the situation. If Ishmael were indeed a teenager, it would be less feasible for Hagar to carry him in the way described in the narratives. Additionally, the image of a young man depicted as helpless under a bush can create a conflicting view of his character, complicating the emotional weight of the story.

In conclusion, the Islamic viewpoint on the story of Hagar and Ishmael as presented in the Torah is marked by skepticism regarding the authenticity of certain verses. Islamic scholars argue that the timeline and events described in the Torah may have been altered, and Islamic tradition suggests that Ishmael was an infant during this period (when departing from Abraham’s household).